Human Trafficking in India: A Gendered Human Rights Failure Rooted in Structural Inequality

Human trafficking in India is often discussed as a crime, an illegal activity that needs to be controlled with the help of law enforcement and rescue operations. While criminal justice responses are important, this framing alone is not complete. Trafficking is not just a crime but a systematic social failure of human rights that is deeply rooted in gender inequality, poverty, discrimination, illiteracy, and social exclusion. Its persistence shows not only the actions of traffickers, but the structural scenario that allows exploitation to flourish. Today, we will dive deeper into understanding human trafficking in India and why it is a gendered problem rooted in a societal divide.

HUMAN Trafficking IN INDIA as a Gendered Reality

Human trafficking in India can be profoundly categorised as a gendered issue since women and girls account for the overwhelming majority of victims trafficked for commercial sexual exploitation (approximately 80–90% according to multiple studies and field reports). Even beyond sexual exploitation, women are disproportionately trafficked into domestic servitude, forced marriage, unpaid care work, and informal labour, where abuse is normalised and hidden within private spaces.

Children are also heavily impacted. Nearly 40% of identified trafficking victims in India are minors, many between the ages of 12 and 16. For girls in particular, early school dropout, child marriage, and unpaid domestic responsibilities significantly increase vulnerability. Since gender norms prioritise only male education and economic participation, it further entrenches this imbalance, leaving girls with fewer choices and limited social protection.

This gendered nature of trafficking is not accidental. It rather reflects power hierarchies that devalue women’s labour, restrict their mobility, and commodify their bodies, making exploitation socially invisible and institutionally neglected.

The Intersection of Poverty, Caste, and Exclusion

Trafficking does not occur in isolation; it emerges where inequalities intersect. Poverty remains a major driver, but poverty alone does not explain trafficking patterns. Caste-based marginalisation plays a crucial role. Studies indicate that 55–60% of trafficking victims belong to Scheduled Castes, and an additional 15–20% are from Scheduled Tribes, despite these groups forming a smaller proportion of the population. This overrepresentation suggests that it is rooted in entrenched caste exclusion rather than individual vulnerability.

Caste discrimination leads to restricted access to education, stable employment, land ownership, and social mobility. In such conditions, migration often seen as a pathway to opportunity becomes a site of risk. Traffickers exploit aspirations for work, dignity, and survival, offering false promises of jobs, education, or marriage.

Social exclusion further compounds vulnerability. Families living on the margins of society often lack access to information, legal awareness, or institutional support. When exploitation occurs, survivors are less likely to report abuse due to fear, stigma, or mistrust of authorities.

Education and the Cycle of Vulnerability

Education is one of the strongest protective factors against trafficking, yet it remains inaccessible for many at-risk populations. Data suggests that 40–50% of identified trafficking victims in India are illiterate, while most others have only primary or incomplete secondary education. Limited education reduces awareness of rights, restricts employment options, and increases dependence on informal labour markets where exploitation is common.

For girls, education is often the first sacrifice in households facing economic distress. Early dropout, combined with gender norms that restrict autonomy, leaves young women vulnerable to deceptive recruitment and coercion. Without education, escape from exploitation becomes even more difficult, reinforcing a cycle of vulnerability that can span generations.

Trafficking as a Human Rights Violation

At its core, human trafficking represents a violation of multiple fundamental human rights: the right to life with dignity, freedom from exploitation, access to education, health, and safe work. Yet institutional responses often treat survivors as evidence rather than rights-holders.

While India registers an average of six trafficking cases per day, conviction rates remain low, with reports indicating that a significant majority of accused traffickers are acquitted due to weak investigations, delayed trials, and survivor traumatization. Survivors themselves frequently face criminalisation, prolonged shelter confinement, and social stigma, rather than comprehensive rehabilitation.

This gap between rescue and reintegration exposes a deeper failure: systems are designed to respond after exploitation occurs, rather than preventing it by addressing root causes.

The Importance of Prevention and Community-Based Approaches

Sustainable anti-trafficking efforts must move beyond reactive models. Prevention requires strengthening communities before exploitation takes place, addressing the social and economic conditions that traffickers exploit.

Grassroots and community-based organisations play a crucial role in this space. By focusing on education access, women’s empowerment, livelihood development, and community awareness, such organisations help reduce vulnerability at its source. Subtle yet consistent interventions—keeping girls in school, supporting women’s income generation, building local awareness—can significantly disrupt trafficking networks over time.

Organisations like Spriha Society work within communities to address these structural vulnerabilities, emphasising dignity, education, and empowerment rather than charity or rescue alone. Their approach reflects a growing recognition that trafficking cannot be ended without addressing inequality, exclusion, and gender injustice.

Moving Toward a Rights-Based Response

A meaningful response to human trafficking in India must be gender-responsive and rights-based. This includes:

• Investing in girls’ education and retention

• Expanding safe livelihood opportunities for women

• Ensuring survivor-centred rehabilitation, not institutionalisation

• Strengthening legal accountability without traumatizing survivors

• Addressing caste and social exclusion as central, not peripheral, issues

Awareness days and campaigns play an important role in visibility, but awareness alone is insufficient. Without sustained policy commitment and grassroots action, trafficking will continue to adapt and persist.

Conclusion

Human trafficking in India is not an isolated criminal problem—it is a mirror reflecting deep social inequities. Its gendered nature exposes how power, poverty, caste, and education intersect to create conditions of extreme vulnerability. Addressing trafficking, therefore, requires more than raids and rescues; it demands systemic change, rooted in human rights, gender justice, and social inclusion. Only when dignity, opportunity, and equality are made accessible to all can trafficking truly be prevented—not just punished.